Council finalized a one-way westbound conversion and parking ban on Nebraska Avenue at Railroad Square, and advanced first readings on recovery residence rules and expanded e-scooter sales at 5707 Main Street.
21 items on the agenda · 10 decisions recorded
On the agenda
- 4Approval of Minutes▶ 0:08
- 5Vox Pop for Items Not Listed on the Agenda or Listed on Consent Agenda▶ 0:08
- 6Consent Agenda▶ 20:05
- 7.a
First Reading, Ordinance 2026-2349: Amendment to the Conditional Use for Electric Scooter and One-Wheel Vehicle Sales and Rental at 5707 Main Street
approvedCouncil held first reading of Ordinance 2026-2349 to amend the conditional use at 5707 Main Street (E Scooters business) to add retail sales of electric bikes and electric dirt bikes, and to allow on-site repair/maintenance limited to warranty work for items sold and rented on site. Council approved the motion but removed the DRB-recommended condition (subsection H) requiring the business to provide customers with state law/safety literature, finding it superfluous and burdensome. The ordinance passed first reading 5-0.
Ord. Ordinance 2026-2349
- motion:Motion to approve the conditional use amendment for 5707 Main Street with the exception of subsection H (the LDB-recommended condition requiring customer literature on state regulations). (passed)5–0
128 Belmont Drive5707 Main StreetE ScootersE Venture CycleWalmartDr. DonaldJohn FerdinandMarlow JonesMr. HallPatel ButlerPeterScott CarboneTimConditional Use amendmentDRB review February 2026DRC review January 2026Downtown Core future land useDowntown Zoning DistrictOrdinance 2026-2349Original conditional use approval March 2021▶ Jump to 20:05 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability
Of ordinances. First reading of ordinance number 2026 2349. Amendment to the conditional use of electric scooters and one way on one wheel vehicle sales and rentals and 5707 Main Street. This ordinance number 2026 2349. An ordinance of the city of New Port Richey, Florida, providing for approval of an amendment to the conditional use for a scooter and one wheel vehicle sales, rental and retail, retail and rental store in the downtown zoning district for the property located at 5707 Main Street, as shown on the map attached hereto as exhibit a and as legally described herein, providing for conflict, severability, and an effective date. Mr. Hall, will you please present the agenda item? Yes, [00:25:04] Mr. Mayor, thank you very much. The request tonight is for a conditional use for property located on 5707 Main Street. Powerpoint will be up in a moment. This is in the downtown right off of main street. It is currently where the E Scooters is located. The existing use is retail sales and rentals of electric scooters and single wheeled personal transportation devices. The request is a conditional use to revise that condition to include retail sales of electric bikes and electric dirt bikes, and and the repair of the electric scooters. There's the location I think we're all familiar with that is downtown. The zoning map shows the zoning as downtown and the future land use shows this as downtown core. Pursuant to our land development code, any use not listed or permitted or prohibited use in the downtown may be considered upon conditional use application, which is before us this evening and additionally pursuant to the code, the following criteria may be addressed. Must be addressed when considering a conditional use. Now, I'm not going to go through each and every one of these. These are clearly outlined within the staff report that was presented to you and is available. But there are seven criteria that need to be established before a conditional use is approved. In march of 2021, a conditional use was approved on this site with six conditions. In january of 2022 of 2026, the drc reviewed an additional request for the app from the applicant, again to revise some of the uses of property to add the dirt bikes, and then also to add the repair of those vehicles. They recommended approval subject to several revised conditions. They took those original six conditions and revised and reorganized those for clarity. In February 2026, the drb recommended approval and added an additional condition to that, and I'll explain that in a moment. They all there also had a discussion of repair versus maintenance, because the repair shop is not an allowed facility within the downtown, they did not recommend per se approval of that. But there was discussion between what is repair and what is maintenance. So there are three conditions that were recommended by the drc and the drb. They're on several slides. I am going to read each of these in their entirety, but they can become long winded, so bear with me. The first condition that was recommended by both the drc and the drb was retail sales of electric scooters, single wheeled transportation devices, electric bikes, and electric dirt bikes, subject to the requirement that no test drives shall occur within the city. Number two, the rental of electric scooters and single wheeled wheeled transportation devices only subject to the following requirements. No vehicles shall be rented to minors. No vehicle shall operated without an unaccompanied adult that no vehicle training shall be conducted or permitted within the public right of way or main street, including both the street and sidewalk. That no vehicle training shall take place on any city owned property without prior written approval from the city manager, and the applicant must be fully executed in an indemnity agreement approved by the city manager and proof, and provide proof of general liability insurance and amount no less than $1 million. Naming the city as an additional insured. Such insurance coverage shall remain in effect at all times as a condition of approved use that the property liability insurance shall be maintained on rental vehicles, that the rental of all rental, or that the rental of all vehicles shall take place between 10 a.m. And 10 p.m. That all rented vehicles shall be returned to the business office between 10 a.m. And 10 p.m. This is a. This is an additional. This is the additional condition that the ldr be requested. Current city ordinances and state laws for safe operation of electric bicycles, electric scooters and [00:30:02] Electric dirt bikes shall be provided to customers as part of the sales of electric bikes, electric scooters and electric dirt bikes. The information may be provided in writing to each customer at the time of each transaction, or summarized on a clearly visible sign at each point of sale for the business. Now, that's not the exact wording the drb worked with, but that is what we put together to encompass the intent of what they were looking for. And then last but not least, this is an additional condition that was discussed by the drb when they were discussing maintenance and repair and after evaluation of what the intent of the ldb was, and looking at the code, it was added by staff to say no maintenance and repair of vehicles shall be conducted on site, except that maintenance and repairs to honor warranties for those devices which have been sold on site and for rental vehicles is allowed so you can maintain and fix the things that are under warranty. This was avatar. This was advertised or I'm sorry, this was mailed to all the adjacent property owners with public notice and the property was posted. That was long winded. A lot of information there, but I'd be more than happy to answer any questions. You may have any public input. 012 there it is. Scott Carbone, 50 707 main street, New Port Richey, Florida. Happy saint patty's day, everyone. Only thing that's changing with our business is we have to go more retail. We've been good stewards of the city. We've followed all the rules up to it's been six years, haven't had any major issues. We agreed back in 20 2122, that was like 15 scooters that were going to rent and that's what we do. I can't pay my bills. I can't pay payroll, I can't do it. I need to go more retail. So I know there's an issue with these e-bikes around different municipalities and cities, and it was brought up to our attention multiple times by the local police that they were convinced that we rent bikes. We don't rent e-bikes. We never have, never will. All we're doing is selling them. Most of our business doesn't come from local people from New Port Richey. They come from out of state, other counties. So when they're suggesting that I have to provide each customer with a written state law of these e-bikes, that doesn't pertain to what happens in the city of New Port Richey compared to palm harbor, saint pete, georgia, new york. I it's you're setting me up for liability to provide incorrect laws that don't pertain to a customer that doesn't live here. So I love I love it here. You guys have been awesome. I think we've provided a great service for everyone that lives down here. And the people that have never been down here before, just to experience our scooters. They're visiting other businesses, so everything stays the same. We just want to go more retail. And then when it comes to the maintenance of our scooters, we provide a one year warranty on everything that we sell. Okay, so we're not a, a repair shop per se. You know, we don't have lifts. We don't have tools like anything major, like an automotive repair shop. But when a 15 year old kid comes in with a flat tire with a scooter, we would like to fix that for him. So I know it's against the I don't know what you would call it, the law or whatnot, but we just want to be good stewards of the city, provide our customers with a one year warranty, whatever they buy. And please don't make us give la luz about e-bikes to every customer because they change all the time. Thank you very much. Anybody else like to speak? Marlow Jones? I'm just here in support. Yes, please. Marlow Jones, New Port Richey, Florida. We should be supporting our small businesses downtown, not putting up barriers that make it harder for people to visit and spend money. E-bike e-bikes are a part of the future. People enjoy them. They are environmentally friendly, as the gentleman said, and they make it more accessible for people downtown. So I just [00:35:01] Strongly support supporting them. They do have a great service and I would like to see their business thrive, and we should be making sure all business owners thrive. Anybody else like to speak? Yes, doctor. Donald, I'm the I chaired the meeting for the lbd where we heard this case. I still believe that there should be some instructions that people get e-bikes very basic for what? What goes to the state law, particularly because there are dangers to e-bikes and there are people that get put in danger from e-bikes when they're on a sidewalk and where they're going, places they shouldn't be when they're using them, like they should not be used. So I still support what we had done at the lbd. So just to set the record clear, that's why we did that, because there are some dangers that are out there, and I think people should be aware that they should not be riding them on a sidewalk. They shouldn't be doing tricks with them. They shouldn't be doing other things. So that's our position. And I think we stood with that pretty strong. Thank you. Anybody else like to speak? I'd just like to speak to that as well. John Ferdinand, 128 Belmont Drive. There's other stores that sell e-bikes or dirt bikes, you know, like walmart, some that may not be in the city limits, some that may. However, nobody's requiring them to provide laws or safety issues in regards to those bikes. Or for instance, if you had a dunkin donuts, is anybody providing the the same material for the cardiovascular system and what threat it is to that, you know, if you're going to restrict one, one business to bringing forth any kind of information or state laws, why shouldn't we require the same with the use of alcohol or a donut, for instance, or eating a sandwich? My own personal opinion. Anybody else like to speak, seeing no one else come forward, bring it back for discussion and vote. Mr. Mayor, before you close, do you does the applicant want to address the council in rebuttal to anything that has been heard? Did you want to come up and say anything about anything that any of the speakers said? The applicant should get the last presentation? Thank you again. Scott Carbone, 50 707 main street. I don't disagree with with the doctor. There definitely should be regulations and rules about where these things can be operated that would go under us. If we're renting them, we can control when we rent something to somebody because that's part of our conditional use and we've been good stewards of that. We're talking retail. When I sell a bike, I can't give that person state law that doesn't live in the state. It just doesn't apply. You know, it's like you're forcing well, not forcing, but you're suggesting suggesting that I, everyone that comes in and buys a unit, I have to give them some state law that doesn't apply. That's just not fair. You know, if they decide to purchase a bike for me and they live two counties away, that's not up to me. I sold it. That's that's not on me what they do. I can only control the rentals and where they can go, where they can't go. As far as retail goes, I can always suggest and we do suggest, look, this is an e dirt bike. They're made for off road, not on road. Do not ride those anywhere on the road but to provide them written literature. I think it opens us up for some sort of legalities. And I don't want to be caught with giving somebody some state law that changes every six months. So again, we're just talking retail. What they do with them is, is their own business. You guys can control if they purchase, if they're on the road, you can go right ahead, write them a ticket or revoke that, that bike. But that's not fair for me being a retail business down here to provide laws that constantly change, that don't apply for someone that lives in two counties, another state or what have you. So just please think about what you're asking about me providing state laws that don't even apply to retail. You can go right exactly seven miles down the road in New Port Richey on E Venture Cycle. They sell the same units we sell. They don't provide those patrons with written state law. So just please take that consideration. I want to stay down here. I love it down here. I just can't do it. Just with scooter rentals, I have to sell [00:40:06] Bikes, scooters in one wheels and provide my customers with a repair service. Thank you very much. So bring it back for discussion about do we have a proposal or I'll take the liberty to make a motion to approve the conditional use. With the exception of the condition presented by the ldb on specifically subsection h that subsection h, recommending the purchaser or provide the business to provide purchasers with applicable literature and state regulations regarding vehicle without without a second. I'll second for the purpose of discussion. Yeah. I mean, as we were going through this, the dale and through the city manager made points for the land development code. Alongside each of the points, he clarified the difference between repair and maintenance. And where I'm getting lost is how we can compel a business to promote state regulations regarding vehicle operation through this conditional use. In my mind, if the state makes changes to the law and they're not updated now, they're promoting improper material at the recommendation of this conditional use, it would make more sense that we just partner with these businesses and provide those materials separate from a conditional use agreement to prevent any sort of liability conversation. And instead of trying to compel a business, it sounds to me it's not I'm not factoring it into my judgment for my motion, but it sounds to me separate from this conversation that that business would be open to partnering with us if we were to produce some sort of materials for them to leave pamphlets or something that provide the correct information. And so that's the reason why I left that exception carved out. It did not, in my mind, promote the purpose of the land development code or what we're trying to achieve here tonight. Second. Oh yeah. Some of what I heard was I can't do that. Well. Physically, you could do it. I mean, if we said and you agreed to it, you could. You also made the comment that someone, you couldn't give somebody something that may not apply a few counties away. If it's a state statute, it would apply anywhere in the state. So I'm kind of leaning to see if there's not a ability to accept the the motion and talk to you all about it. But to me, a simple document that identifies the the connection to the state statutes eliminates the entirety of the reading of the state statute and says here, back to the comment by my colleague here. I think just because somebody else doesn't warn somebody that they can't do something is not a good excuse. I know from a competitive standpoint, you don't want to have someone run off because they they look to do it. Anyone who's been to the skateboard park or who knows that a piece of equipment with a motor on it can do things that it wasn't intended to do, and that they will do those things that it's not intended to do probably isn't going to be stopped no matter what you know from doing it. And so it does fall back to us to, to really, you know, enforce the laws. So if the motion is to let the gentleman sell the, the bikes, and I don't know if there's alternative language or not, but I would like to see if there is that can say. And that they should provide some communication. So I don't know how specific it was to say, here's a copy of the Florida statutes. Nobody's going to read that anyway. God only knows. We don't read it up here as much as we could. You know, if we really want to be tightened to it. But I think that do this, don't do that in the city, in the city of New Port Richey, this you cannot do. And here are the state statutes and the city does enforce them. But to the gentleman's point, it's not going to be up to us to to my mind, to be able to enforce something on someone that's selling something. I appreciate the, the, the idea. [00:45:06] And I, as I understand it, the rental does require that to begin with. So what would be so difficult? But to enhance that information to the renters? Because I'm not sure just how strong that language is to say everyone should get documentation that says, and by the way, you're buying something that's regulated by the Florida statutes. And here's the statute number. And you might be smart to read it because they're not going to read it. First of all, if you just hand it to them, it's a good it's a good attempt, I understand it. But to patel's comment, I think when we put it into the law, I think it's a little tricky. I don't know what the rest of you all feel about it, but I was glad to hear from your opinion. Yeah, I think I kind of go along with what they're saying. Just something quick, you know, here's some here's a state statute. Here's a website. Please look at it in reference to state laws. I mean, I kind of lean, I mean, I understand the intent and I kind of lean more towards the, the safety factor of riding them. But that's probably a manufacturer's, you know, pamphlet that they would provide with the bike itself. So I don't think we have any any cause to do that. So I mean, I'd be for just hand them something with a website and saying, please refer to state laws. That way it makes it easy, you know, to do a bunch of things. The question is, would that be allowed in the motion? I did, you know, let me run the show. Please let him. Don't interrupt him. He's done. No he's not and I plus I got one other person. Okay, let's see what else you got. Yeah. No, I'm good with that. It's just something simple. I don't want to put undue burden on them, you know, with paperwork having to fill out and give it to them. You know, it's just something easy to just hand to him. So here, please refer to the state laws. It is governed by the state. Move on. Right. So I'll address it to Tim. Can we can we alter that? So because I'm in agreeance with what they're saying. I mean, obviously we want to help him keep his business. We want him to sell them. But we also need to be conscientious of safety and awareness. Obviously, like, you know, peter said, not everybody's going to read it, but it's our it's our due diligence that we need to at least provide it, whether they read it or not, that's up to them. Well, I have to say, when I when I wrote this, I was kind of troubled by this particular provision. So I'm glad you're having a discussion about it. I think it is kind of vague. I do think it's difficult for them to adhere to it. It could be more of an advisory thing and say you should provide. Of course, that won't give you any teeth to enforce it if they don't. I added the part about putting up a sign as an alternate, because that wasn't part of what the ldb had. And I kind of pictured one of those signs you see behind the register and it says, you know, these are the things you can't do with these things or something like that. Keep in mind, we don't currently have a city ordinance on this. I know this has been a discussion. It may come before you and you may want it to come before you and, and task us with coming up with an ordinance about where these things can ride. Right now, they can ride anywhere by state law. So they're allowed to go pretty much on sidewalks in the street, wherever you can walk or ride a bicycle. So my feeling would be, you ought to approve the motion that councilman Patel Butler made, because I think that this really is superfluous, I think. But if you want to pare it down somehow or say that they should provide an information on a website or something like that, we can certainly add that. I think if we adopt an ordinance, there's an opportunity there to put some language in. That's anybody that sells these within the city shall also provide this information or provide a copy of it of a summary sheet. Like I think one of you mentioned something like that, but I think the motion that was made, I think is a good motion. But if you want to change it, it would be up to the maker of the motion and the maker of the second, or you'd have to move to amend and have a vote on that amended motion to amend. No, I just I just want to add in there that, you know, we need to make sure that we don't make it so difficult for him that it's going to be hard for him to sell units. Because I understand what he's saying is if you force people all this information on them, you know, the fact whether they live here or not, that's really irrelevant. It's you're buying it here. So at least know the rules where you're buying it. And then if they leave, then, then so be it. But based on what he's saying, if they are changing these rules, often the sign would be a great idea. But the problem is then that creates him replacing the sign more often. So I think maybe, you know, a link, a qr code, [00:50:06] Something that's easily changeable that he can give to them, I think might be a good alternative. I kind of like the proposal, but what I. And you brought up the word we can amend it. So I think as we grow with the state and the state starts changing its rules, then we can go back and amend this, you know, to the point where where we fine tune it, you might say, well, you won't be able to amend this conditional use once you approve it. This is the condition that will apply to that particular use. And you're making a finding that this is a reasonable condition to apply to that particular use. So this condition itself won't be amended unless it comes back before you in some form. But we wouldn't be in a position to come back to you and say, hey, we want you to pare down this conditional use or change it. That's up to the applicant. That would be up to the owner of the property to do that. So you really, if this is something that's important, this would be the time to deal with it. If you think that you're happy with patel's, I'm happy with the motion because I really don't think you need this to protect the citizens. I think that this information, all those in favor signify by I, I, I, I, I, I, I. That's five
Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 7.b
First Reading, Ordinance 2026-2352: Certified Recovery Residences
approvedCouncil held first reading of Ordinance 2026-2352, amending the Land Development Code to add definitions and a new section governing Certified Recovery Residences in compliance with Florida Senate Bill 954 (2025). Staff explained the ordinance mirrors state statute requirements with no expansion. A motion to approve was made and seconded; council expressed reluctant support given it is state-mandated.
Ord. Ordinance 2026-2352
- motion:Motion to approve Ordinance 2026-2352 on first reading regarding Certified Recovery Residences. (passed)
Mr. HallMs. ManseDRC December 2025 recommendationLDB February 2026 recommendationLand Development Code Section 2.01.00Land Development Code Section 7.28.00Ordinance 2026-2352Senate Bill 954▶ Jump to 50:06 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability
Nothing. Moving on to first first reading of ordinance 2026 2352 certified recovery residents. This is ordinance number 2026 2352 an ordinance of the city of New Port Richey, Florida, providing for amendment of section 2.01.00 of chapter two of the land development code pertaining to definitions. Providing for new definitions. Providing for the creation of a new section. 7.28.00 of chapter seven of the land development code pertaining to certified recovery residences, providing for submittal requirements and provisions for reasonable accommodations, providing for severability, providing for codification, and providing for an effective date, as indicated by the city attorney. This ordinance is an amendment to the land development code, and it is to comply with Florida statute, and Mr. Hall is prepared to present the agenda item. Thank you, miss manse. Tonight before you is a request to review and approve an ordinance related to community recovery residences required to maintain compliance with state statutes. We are looking to amend land development code, providing for additional definitions for the creation of a new section that pertains specifically to certified recovery residences. On June 25th, 2025, senate bill enacted senate bill 954 enacted, which requires that all communities and municipalities make an ordinance that will address these issues. I'm going to talk about in a moment. It amend the current Florida statutes requiring for the adoption of an ordinance for review and approval of certified recovery residences, and to provide reasonable accommodations for local land use regulations to prohibit that serve to prohibit the establishment of those. Currently, our ldc does not provide for either of the above. So that's why we're before you today to amend it. So we come in compliance with state statutes. Section one of our land development code would be amended to add the following definitions. All of these definitions will basically have the same meaning of the section floor of Florida statutes. Instead of actually defining what they are, the definition will say state states as per state statutes. The other ldc revision establishes the following. A submittal process for certified recovery residences and reasonable accommodations. The application contents. The determination of whether these applications can be done administratively, or whether they need to come to city council. The criteria for reasonable accommodations for these establishments, and how we potentially revoke them for certain issues and make sure that it is we add in a nondiscriminatory amendment. So for our ldc to revise to be revised, we need to follow the guidelines. The following two guidelines the need and justification for the change, and whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the comp plan and consistent with other federal and state laws. That's the whole reason we're coming forward, because this is a state law that's requiring us to do that. In december of 2025, the drc did recommend this approval, recommended and approved this in february of 2026. The ldb reviewed and recommended this [00:55:01] Ordinance, and it's here before you this evening for considerations. If you have any questions, I'd be happy to ask them. Public comment seeing no one come forward, bring it back for discussion or vote. Can I hear a proposal? I'll move to approve? Do I have a second? I second the maker? No, you you know, it's a pretty straightforward state statute, you know, wants us to make these changes. So we're going to follow along. Second. I'm good. Yeah. I think the the topic is an honorable topic, but I think this is yet another example of our state telling us we can do certain things and then not trusting us to do those things and carving out exceptions at the state level because some city didn't follow some sort of requirement. So I'll go along with it since it's required. But. Okay, you can drag me along as well, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. All those in favor signify before you just I just want to clarify too, for the record, that this ordinance represents exactly what the state is requiring us to do and nothing more. So you are doing exactly what they're making us do, and you're not expanding on it or anything. It's just we're following the state requirements. So I just want to make that clear. For the record. Thank you. All those in favor
Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 7.c
Second Reading, Ordinance No. 2026-2351: Amending Section 23-46 of the Code of Ordinances RE: One Way Street and No Parking on Railroad Square
approvedCouncil held the second and final reading of Ordinance 2026-2351, which prohibits parking on Nebraska Avenue between Adams Street and Grand Boulevard and designates that stretch as a one-way westbound street to support pedestrian-friendly improvements at Railroad Square. Concerns were raised about delivery truck access and rideshare/delivery driver behavior, prompting discussion of possible future 15-minute parking spaces in nearby lots. The ordinance passed 5-0.
Ord. Ordinance 2026-2351
- motion:Motion to approve second reading of Ordinance 2026-2351 prohibiting parking and designating one-way westbound traffic on Nebraska Avenue between Adams and Grand. (passed)5–0
5637 Georgia AvenueNebraska Avenue between Adams Street and Grand BoulevardDoorDashGet HookedSteamworksUberVerizonChief CoachmanDebbieDr. CahillJune Pearson15-minute parking proposalOrdinance 2026-2351Railroad Square improvementsSection 23-46 of Code of OrdinancesSmart Cities discussion▶ Jump to 55:01 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability
Signify by I, I. That's five nothing. Second reading of ordinance 2026 2351 amendment section 2346 of the code of ordinances. One way street parking. No parking. Railroad square. This ordinance number 2026 2351. An ordinance of the city of New Port Richey, Florida, providing for the prohibition of parking on Nebraska Avenue between Adams Street and Grand Boulevard. Providing for amendment of section 2346 of chapter 23 of the code of ordinances pertaining to one way streets providing for designation of Nebraska Avenue between Adams Street and Grand Boulevard as a one way westerly direction. Street, providing for the posting of appropriate signs, providing for enforcement, providing for conflict, severability, and an effective date. Mr. Mayor, members of council, I'm proud to tell you that we're to a point in the implementation of improvements on railroad square, that we're able to effectuate an order related to traffic control. And in that respect, chief coach, and is prepared this evening to make a presentation to you in that respect. Chief Coachman. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Council members, so this is the second reading, second and final reading of ordinance 2026 2351. We know this prohibits parking for all vehicles, with the exception of emergency vehicles on nebraska avenue between adams and grand, and also designates this stretch as a westbound one way street. This ordinance is essential for both improving traffic safety and the safety of pedestrians that will be accessing this area. Staff recommends that the city council conduct a second and final reading of ordinance number 2026 2351. Answer any questions that you may have. Comment. Seeing no one come forward, most of them are down there at railroad square right now. Go ahead. Come on. Yes. Again, I just have a question about that because there are a lot of those businesses that have access only from nebraska avenue, and they also have delivery trucks that come in there. If those trucks are not allowed to idle, I guess it's going to be on main street. And that's even more dangerous than having them on nebraska. And I have talked to a few owners. Unfortunately, they're not aware of of this regulation, and most of them are out tonight with saint patty's day, having their businesses run there. So I think that's a real consideration is how delivery trucks would approach that. And if they're going to be parking on main street instead of nebraska, to try to go around to deliver things. And some of them do not have a delivery even from main street. So that could create a problem. And I just hope you're aware of that. Mr. Mayor, if you'd like me to respond. Yeah, yeah, I know we go ahead. I think I just I was just saying it's it's a it's going to be open during the day for deliveries. The businesses down there are aware of it. So it's not it's not going to be open at night for deliveries. But that's not true. It'll be closed for deliveries at all times. They were getting deliveries during the day. This is no deliveries. Okay. Debbie. I'm sorry. That's okay. In that respect, the businesses have been receiving deliveries during the course of construction for an eight month period of time, so they're all very much accustomed to receiving deliveries. The deliveries have not been accommodated through main street, and I've conducted a [01:00:02] Meeting with all of the businesses to introduce all of the changes to include the one way traffic, the no parking on nebraska avenue conducted one as late as yesterday with all of the businesses, and they're fully aware and fully supportive of the changes that have been made on nebraska avenue. And they have had conversations with their distributors, and they're prepared to and supportive of the plans to go forward. And they're all out there tonight enjoying the benefits of the public, improvements that have been made to support the business community. Any other public comments? June Pearson, 56, 37 georgia avenue. Just this latest. Today, I called to get a lunch and go get. And I asked the business how was I to get to them since that area was blocked off and I was told to pull up just beyond their entrance into the nebraska entrance barricaded area. Leave my car in park and get out and come into the restaurant and pick up my lunch. So that's the practice. Are those no parking signs up yet, chief? Yeah. We're on. We're on nebraska, correct? Yeah. This this is a one way street. It's 11ft wide. There's no way people could park on there. Not even for talking. Yeah, they're talking by the ballads on the. Yeah. Okay. Yeah, yeah. So we're going to get no parking signs there. We do have plans to put them up once you effectuate the order. Okay. Bring it back for discussion about. I'll move to approve second. No, I you know, I've had discussions with multiple business owners about this, this whole project. They are super excited. Can't wait. And the whole point of doing this was to create a walkable, pedestrian friendly area. And it just goes with not having vehicles there, you know, because as many of us know, you go to steamworks and you're outside. When the two way traffic was there, you got to worry about somebody running you down. So I'm just super happy that this is done and can't wait for the signs to go up. So yeah, I think the vision for this project is in line with what we've been pushing as a city for years now, which is to make it more walkable, to make the downtown more connective. Doctor cahill brought up an excellent point. It's one I mentioned at the prior council meeting and was told that there would be no vehicles whatsoever, so that was a consistent message. I will say on social media, there were a couple business owners expressing since then, since this ordinance has come up for its first reading, expressing that there would be parking or deliveries allowed, you've had your an additional business meeting with the residents or excuse me, with the business owners. Since those facebook comments, I'm assuming they'll die down and some of the misinformation will go away. You know, it might be time to think about in those parking lots where the verizon building is and in the back end of the building along grand, those two parking lots on two of the closest spots, or even in the front where main street is adopting some 15 minute parking spots for the purposes of uber. Doordash, smaller deliveries. Because the problem you're going to run into is our business owners know now, but you're still going to have doordash drivers, you're still going to have uber drivers who are by no means paying attention to a local city council meeting who, without some proper enforcement or an alternative place to put parking for them, they're going to be very much incentivized to just pull up. So I don't know what that looks like from a police department enforcement standard, but I know from a a policy making standard, we might need to start opening the door to a conversation we've had in the past, which is about some regulated parking along our businesses. Thank you. Well regulated parking. First of all, let's put the rumor out that I've seen that we're going to put pay for parking out because I'm not for parking meters, because I saw something in the the great ethernet out there about parking meters. But I was thinking the same comments that were made over deliveries. And it leads us to the bigger [01:05:07] Discussion about smart cities. And so we've done something. We've made a bold move. I'm with you all on it. It's walkable. And we're I'm not I'm not opposed to it at all. Excuse me, but I do think that in front of from Get Hooked all the way to adams street along main street, it's no longer a good location for food trucks. It's no longer a good location for anything that's going to block the view of somebody coming in and going out. And it could certainly be highly located with some kind of time limits as as to parking spaces that you're allowed to spend. And that could result in a parking ticket if one got one. I saw from our audit that we issued one parking ticket a year for the past five years, so we could always have a few more parking tickets if we needed to for people not following. But I, I'll support the motion, but we're not done because we have a problem and we're going to have to face it. I agree, but that's all from me for now. I just want to say that a lot of these comments up here should be done in communication. All those in favor signify by I, I, I. That's five. Nothing. Moving on board. Reappointment. Doctor
Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 8.a
Board Re-Appointment: Dr. Donald Cadle, Jr., Land Development Review Board
approvedCouncil reappointed Dr. Donald Cadle, Jr. to the Land Development Review Board for a three-year term running through April 6, 2029. He has served on the board since 2013.
- motion:Motion to reappoint Dr. Donald Cadle, Jr. to the Land Development Review Board for a term through April 6, 2029. (passed)
▶ Jump to 1:05:07 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability
Cahill for land development review board. Well, Mr. Mayor, this one's a true pleasure. Doctor cahill has served on the land development review board since 2013. He has served as an honorable member of that board. His current term lapses. On April 6th of 2026. The terms of office on that board are for three years. He is interested in renewing his term of office, and if you reappoint him to the board, his term of office would span through April 6th of 2029, and the staff is hopeful that you will do so. Would you like to speak? Any other comment from the public? If not, I'll bring it back for for discussion. A vote for approval. Second to maker. Thank you. Thank you, sir for serving. We appreciate it a second. Yes, sir. I'm still go to your dental office even though you're not there. I should save that for communication, though. Oh my god. Just to say that again, I think it's a testament to the health of our city. When an ldb item can come before us that we don't necessarily agree with in its entirety. And then in the same night, we are hoping to bring to to encourage doctor cahill to stay with us and continue his volunteer ship and his lead of the ldb. So thank you. Yeah. I just want to thank you for putting your time in. We do appreciate it. Thank you. I'll save my comments to communication. All those in favor signify by I, I I. That's
Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 8.b
Board Re-Appointment: Renee Tyner, Library Advisory Board
approvedCouncil reappointed Renee Tyner to a second three-year term on the Library Advisory Board, ending April 6, 2029. A statement from Tyner was read by the Clerk expressing gratitude, and a council member praised her volunteer service with the Friends of the Library.
- motion:Motion to reappoint Renee Tyner to the Library Advisory Board for a second three-year term ending April 6, 2029. (passed)5–0
▶ Jump to 1:05:07 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability
Five nothing for reappointment of Renee Tyner public library advisory board. Yes, miss tyner has just completed her first term on the library advisory board, and she has indicated an interest to complete a second term, a second three year term. And she is being recommended to for a renewal of that term. And her term would span through April 6th of 2029. If you choose to reappoint her to serve on that board, and I believe she has a statement or she has submitted a statement and the clerk will read the statement if her term is reappointed, please do. This is on behalf of miss tyner. She says, dear council members, please, please accept my apology for not being able to attend this meeting in person. However, I do wish to convey my sincere gratitude for being able to be an advocate for our city library. I feel extremely honored to work with a great group of people who know how important it is for us to support the needs of our library director and staff, as well as our community. I know the best way to protect our libraries is to get involved with them, so I look forward to serving another three years on the library council board. Respectfully, Renee Tyner, we have any public comment. Of the library advisory board. Since [01:10:13] Renee is not here, I'll embarrass her a little bit and just let you know that during that first term, she really served really outstandingly, not only on the library advisory board, but in volunteer efforts through all the projects that the library does, and is a very active member of the Friends of the Library board as well. And she's just a perfect example of people just volunteering their time and their energy and their expertise for this city. This is just a great town when it comes to so many people, such a large percentage of the population that volunteers and the library has been a great beneficiary of that. So we very strongly recommend her reappointment. Any other comments? Seeing no one else come forward, bring it back for discussion and vote. I'll move approval. I'll second. All been said. Second, thank you for your service. All been said. Thank you very. Just one other comment. Since it's my turn, if you have a chance to volunteer anywhere, the library would love it. All those in favor signify by I, I. That's five.
Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 8.c
Annual Sewer and Manhole Lining Rehabilitation Project
approvedCouncil approved a piggyback agreement with Inliner Solutions, LLC for sanitary sewer gravity main rehabilitation in an amount not to exceed $174,159.57, using cured-in-place pipe (CIPP) lining for approximately 2,702 linear feet of 8-inch and 10-inch pipe in the North River, East Madison, and Southeast neighborhoods. The agreement piggybacks on the City of Hollywood's IFB-001-2023-002 contract.
Not to exceed $174,159.57
- motion:Move for approval of the piggyback agreement with Inliner Solutions, LLC for sanitary sewer gravity main rehabilitation not to exceed $174,159.57. (passed)5–0
Spring Flower DriveWashington StreetCity of HollywoodInliner Solutions, LLCMansonMillerCity of Hollywood IFB-001-2023-002Cured-in-Place Pipe (CIPP) liningEast Madison neighborhoodNorth River neighborhoodPublic Works Capital Improvement ProgramSoutheast neighborhood▶ Jump to 1:10:13 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability
Nothing. And your sewer lining rehabilitation project. Mr. Miller, could you present the agenda item, please? Thank you, miss manson. Good evening. Mayor and city council staff is requesting the city council review and consider approval of an agreement with Inliner Solutions, LLC for sanitary sewer gravity. Main rehabilitation in an amount not to exceed 174,159 $57. The proposed agreement follows the same conditions and unit pricing established under the City of Hollywood's ifb dash 001 dash 20 3-002 contract, and it uses and its use is consistent with the city's purchasing procedure and guidelines. This type of rehabilitation project has been included annually in the public works capital improvement program as a part of a proactive strategy to address aging infrastructure within the city. The selected rehabilitation method. This is the cured in place pipe. It provides a significant cost advantage. It reduces the time that we have to spend out in the roadway, shutting down the roadway, ripping up the pipe and replacing it, and disrupting the flow of traffic for our residents. So this also allows for us to really get in and deal with some of this infrastructure in a timely manner, much more efficiently than anywhere else. The current project will include the installation of approximately 2700, or 2702 linear feet of eight inch and ten inch c I p p lining. Recent inspections conducted by the sewer collections maintenance staff have identified deterioration in several gravity sewer mains located within the residential neighborhoods. This is kind of an overall map of that. The affected pipes exhibited cracking infiltration of water and sand. That's kind of your typical I and I that you'll find in your clay pipe a root intrusion. And if this is left unaddressed, the continued continued deterioration could lead to failures throughout the system and may damage streets and public right of ways. Additionally, the compromised condition of these pipes contribute to increased runtimes in the lift stations and resulting in higher operational maintenance costs, including more frequent equipment repairs and increased treatment demands. As you can see here on these maps, we have identified the following areas. You have the north river neighborhood. This area here by simms along Washington Street, you have the east madison neighborhood. And then last we have the southeast neighborhood here. And that goes along Spring Flower Drive. So approval of the piggyback agreement is recommended at this time. And I'm here for any questions. Have any public comment seeing no one come forward bring it back for discussion. Vote. Move for approval. Second I'm good. Second, I don't know how many more clay pipes there are out there, but got it. Good to replace. Is this tearing up just the road or is it going to connect to the where the residents are at to know this? This will go up into the laterals, but it won't tear up any of the roadway. The way that they go is they go in through the manhole and they'll push in kind of the steam vapor like thing. And it lines the interior of the pipe with like this, you know, few millimeter thick lining that's supposed to [01:15:01] Last more than 50 years on the pipe. Okay, keep the infrastructure flowing. Safety first. Roads aren't pretty. All those in favor signify by I, I. That's five. Nothing.
Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 8.d
Resolution No. 2026-10: Inviting Pasco County to Enter into an Interlocal Service Boundary Agreement
approvedCouncil adopted Resolution 2026-10 inviting Pasco County to enter into an Interlocal Service Boundary Agreement under Florida Statutes Ch. 171, focused on recreation services (notably the city's Recreation and Aquatic Center used by many county residents). The motion authorizes the City Manager to begin the formal process and directs the City Attorney to determine whether the City of New Port Richey can be included in the service area map.
Ord. Resolution 2026-10
- motion:Approve Resolution 2026-10 as written and direct the City Attorney to review whether the City of New Port Richey can be included in the municipal service area map, and include them if legally permissible. (passed)
Highway 19Old Gulf High School propertyCommissioner MarianoCouncilman AltmanJonasCRACoast to Coast TrailFlorida Statutes Ch. 171.203Interlocal Service Boundary Agreement ActPasco County recreation impact feesRecreation and Aquatic CenterResolution No. 2026-10▶ Jump to 1:15:01 in the videoShow transcriptHide transcript
Broadcast caption · reformatted for readability
Resolution number 2026 ten. Inviting Pasco county to enter into interlocal service boundary agreement. This is resolution number 2610 2026 ten. Initiating resolution of the city council. The city of New Port Richey, Florida inviting Pasco county, Florida to enter into an inter local service boundary agreement pursuant to the interlocal service boundary agreement act, providing for a municipal service area for recreation services, providing for designation of the area and the map attached hereto. Providing issues for negotiation. Providing for use of facilities, providing for compensation and providing the city manager authorization to proceed to implement the procedures for approval of an interlocal boundary service agreement in accordance with the act. Mr. Mayor, members of council. This is a topic that Councilman Altman has been bringing up for discussion with you for several years now, and based on those discussions, it sounded like there was a good amount of interest on your part and advancing the topics, the topic and the purpose of an interlocal service boundary agreement is really just a have a discussion with another local unit of government and in this case it is the county and this is allowed under section one 7020 and one through 170 .212 of Florida statutes. And what it really is, it's an alternative to annexation. And the goal is to encourage different levels of government to talk about ways to provide services that are efficient, and so that we aren't duplicating services and we're avoiding intergovernmental conflicts and having discussions between units of government is a very good idea. The types of discussions that take place usually talk about the type of services that you want to provide, and the manner of compensation that would be used to provide for the services that are provided, the area that you want to provide services within, what you do, if theres any type of disagreement and what type of insurance there might be, those type of typical topics that you would handle in any type of an agreement that you would have for any type of service. And I'll let Councilman Altman jump in at any point. About this topic, because this really is something that he had in mind. But what we want to talk specifically about is use of our recreation and aquatic center. Pardon me, because we do have a high number of county residents that do rely on the use of our recreation and aquatic center, some of whom are members of the facility, others of whom participate in programs, some of which are daily visitors. And there there could be benefit in rather than having that type of a system, having conversations with the county about doing it differently. And the the first step in the in a process to having a conversation with the county is to advance a notice like this, where we invite the county to enter into a discussion about a boundary agreement. Really stage one, it is stage one. There are several stages involved in the process. If we go this route and the attorney's much better versed than I am in the process under Florida statutes, I. I would pick up the phone and call the county administrator if I wanted to talk about something. So this is just a little bit more formalized, a process, but and it requires their participation within like predetermined time periods, and it gets everybody at the table, not just the county administrator. And I, it [01:20:01] Involves all of the elected officials as well. Want to add something? I don't know if Councilman Altman wanted to jump in first or I'll wait till after this public comment. Okay. I just tell you a little bit about the process. I think the city manager described it very well. I would just say that this is the first step. You send out this initiating resolution, and then there's a period by which the county responds. We also have to notify all of the other municipalities and special districts within the county. And they those other agencies have the right to join in and respond and initiate their own if they like. But the county has 60 days to respond to it. And then there's a period of negotiation that can last up to six months. And then failing that, there can be a request by either party to have a joint meeting of the two boards, in this case would be the county and the city. And failing that, there can be a mediation. But there's nothing in the statute that compels anyone to enter into an local service boundary agreement. It's just a formula, a formula to have these public discussions. And the statute does encourage the elected officials to be involved in those negotiations and to be a part of those negotiations. So we'd have to we'd have to determine all of that. This would be the first step and then see what the county's response is, and then we take it from there. Any public comment, seeing no one come forward, bring it back for pete. Thank you mayor. So the the items that are available for negotiation, as have been mentioned include public safety, fire, emergency rescue and medical water and wastewater, road ownership, construction and maintenance, conservation, parks and recreation, as well as stormwater management and drainage. Stormwater is a good example, just not what we're looking for here. But because basins really need to have one plan. And so when jurisdictions cross over, it may well be that the county should be talking to us about the green key issue that Commissioner Mariano always brings up. But for the purpose of this, it was really the recreation side because as the county has divided itself into three sections west, central and east, and they have been having impact fees collected for future development and for future need. And they are, as we speak, planning some super parks over on the east side. The comment about the other municipalities is something really that I want to mention, because in, in dade city, they, they have a kind of partway. They've got a splash pad now. And so they're developing some more recreational activity, but they've relied on the county to operate the facilities. So the county is engaging right now in a review of all of their interlocal agreements. So the interlocal agreements, as referenced by the city manager that she could get on the phone with and they could establish and bring to us to look at is less formal than this. But as we have just acquired the Gulf, the Old Gulf High School property, and as we also have a joint interest with them in the piece on Highway 19, us working closer, closer together is important. So there's parks and recreation, and the focus of this would be just to open the door to say, you have on your list for four of the 121 athletic fields are in New Port Richey. And I know there was some concern that that we didn't have our own athletic field or something. So we have to get over the problems on our our edge as council members and commissioners so that we can talk to each other honestly, to say you've got all the football fields, but you have two swimming pools in the county. At that point, you might be building a couple more, but if you look at the scatter maps in there, really elaborate recreation program. And I would, I would recommend that our recreation department goes to the public meeting on recreation. There's a workshop that the county is putting out on recreation. When you look at their map, they're not including even a connection of the coast to coast trail into our city because we aren't working close enough together. So my goal is a that the funding of that recreation center can be appropriately managed by us receiving some of the taxes that go towards recreation centers from their overall budget. So if they can identify how much they're charging, how much they're getting charged for those operations, and we accept them [01:25:04] Into it, and that could expand our recreation budget extremely and allow us then to offer even more services. So it's really not a matter of what can we take from them, but what can we get for what we're already giving that will allow us to give more? And so that's the whole pitch, and it has to be managed the right way and not have folks immediately, you know, butt heads or worried that somebody else is in their territory. That's what originally happened when they first went to recreation and library services. And as a result, the city residents of New Port Richey have paid the full amount of the library assessments for all of these years. While we have our own library that's working independently, but we can go to their library and that's been their argument. We have our own recreation, but we could go to theirs. Well, we have the best pools in the county, and we can let the residents know that we are the host of the site of the county, which we are. We need help to be able to manage it because the budgets are going to get tougher and tougher. They're also proposing some other taxes. And with all of what's happening in tallahassee, I think it's an important time for us as elected officials to make sure that we have policy direction at the county level as well, to work with us. And the one thing that it does say just to in this chapter is 171 203 interlocal service boundary agreements, not 170, but. 171 203 under what looks to be an item number nine, it says each local government. I'm sorry, I'm going past nine. The next page on 918 elected local government officials are encouraged to participate actively and directly in the negotiation process for developing an interlocal service boundary agreement. So again, the statutes and the motion today is to get the city manager to begin that discussion. They'll do all their background as usual, but I think there's some give and take. You know, we have we have their money in their mind back from the CRA. And we're using it for the kind of things that they should be proud of us using it for. So I think it's a chance for us to really toot our horn and let them know just how much we're doing. While they're excited about seeing what's happening in the city. And maybe we can, you know, develop that partnership, also. No, I'm saying that negotiations could come because then I'll look for a second. Oh, you want a motion? I'll move to approve this with the one amendment, which would be to include in the map the city limits of New Port Richey. Before you make that amendment. I was just looking at the statute, and Councilman Altman brought this up to me earlier that they had been taken out of this area. And I'm looking at the definitions of a municipal service area in the statute, and the definition includes one or more of the following areas. Each one of those is an unincorporated area. So I don't believe that we can enter into that type of agreement with this statute with New Port Richey. So I don't think we should include that in the area in the map, and I don't think that we should include them in this. They will get notified. And if they want to participate in the in the negotiations, they will be able to do that. But the statute doesn't seem to contemplate that we would have a municipal service boundary. Enter interlocal service boundary agreement with the municipality, with the county. So the motion then is to approve this as written and request that the attorney review his on the spot legal advice to determine whether or not the city of New Port Richey could be included in the map, and to have this move forward and to include them if he can. Yeah. Okay. Second, no, I mean, we've been talking about this. I mean, you know, I'm on the tourism board and all the money keeps going to the east side of the county. So we need to do something to create a little more urgency on this side. So some of that money that's going over there is going to come over here. And if they're not going to listen to us, I think if we get the county involved with us, they might start listening. No, I like it and I'm looking forward to see where it goes. This, I know that the topic sparks this service agreement would be exclusive to parks. Or does it open the door to talking about all the levels of service that are allowed under the statute, [01:30:02] Or would that have to be its own separate service agreement? Well, you can set the you can set the discussion items. And that's one of the things that you're allowed to do in this particular resolution. We only address recreation services and none of the other possible services that are provided under the statute. And councilman, read some of those off. So no, this one, as it stands, is limited to recreation and that. But that doesn't mean that the county can add other issues to. And they may say, well, we want to talk about this particular issue or whatever it might be. The statute also says there could be there could be with him having a conversation. The statute says there could be multiple requests. So even if it was a separate agreement, it's I think the math is complicated. Is the problem. Yeah. I think Councilman Altman has been advocating for this for a very long time. And without knowing a lot of the the tax implications and the like, the legality part of it, I went along and issued my soft support without seeing the material. And the material also looks great. Great. It looks like we're both going to have a chance to talk at the table. And I think, Mr. Jonas, you have really taken a a vocal stance on this too, with your conversations from the tourism approach. And so I appreciate the city manager for for seeing that there are there is a there is a sort of consensus up here to move forward. And taking that seriously and starting to hit the ground on this. So looking forward to seeing it come into fruition. They give us credit on your committee that we have a oyster season. There you go. That's about all we have over here. All those in
Original caption was ALL CAPS; this page lowercases and capitalizes sentence starts. Names from the meeting’s entity index are restored. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.
- 9Communications▶ 1:30:02
- 1Call to Order – Roll Call
- 2
Pledge of Allegiance
Recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance.
- 3
Moment of Silence
Moment of silence.
- 4.a
March 3, 2026 Regular Meeting Minutes
Approval of the minutes from the March 3, 2026 regular meeting.
- 6.a
Purchases/Payments for City Council Approval
on consentReview and authorize payment of recurring expenditures over $25,000, including Waste Pro of Florida, Tampa Bay Water, Mauldin & Jenkins, Duke Energy, and Appalachian Material Services.
- 6.b
Cultural Affairs Committee Minutes - November 2025 - January 2026
on consentReview and approve the minutes from the Cultural Affairs Committee's monthly meetings held between November 2025 and January 2026.
Andrea FigartBeth FreggerCourtney King-MerrillJennifer HeltonJoyce HasnootKelly SmallwoodKim BrustLarnelle ScottPaula AthansRich MeltonSuzy SaxeVincent GaddyAmerica 250 CelebrationFree Notes Harmony ParkHealth & Wellness SeriesHispanic Heritage FestivalOktoberfestPolar ExpressRailroad Square Re-Opening - 6.c
Police Pension Board Minutes - November 2025
on consentReview and acknowledge the minutes from the November 18, 2025 Police Pension Board meeting, which is an independent board overseeing retirement plans for sworn police officers.
Andco ConsultingG.R.S.Garcia Hamilton & AssociatesIntercontinental Real EstateKlausner, Kaufman, Jensen & LevinsonLogan CapitalMarinerSalem TrustSaltmarsh CPA'sAndrew ExlineBen MonkiewiczCrystal DunnDana StewardsonFrank FerreriGlen PrattGregory WilliamsHeather FiorentinoJennifer GainfortJusto GonzalezLindsey GarberT. Scott BakerTim NashTimothy Berge13th checkBoycott of Israel statuteInvestment Policy StatementSupplemental Benefits - 6.d
You arrived here from a search for “Saltmarsh CPA”
Fire Pension Board Minutes - November 2025
on consentReview and acknowledge the minutes from the November 18, 2025 Fire Pension Board meeting, which oversees retirement plans for sworn firefighters.
Accounting & Consulting ProfessionalsBarclaysCommercial Insurance SpecialistsEaton VanceFiduciary TrustJP MorganKlausner, Kaufman, Jensen & LevinsonMarinerSaltmarsh CPATrustmarkBob LangfordChris FitchCrystal DunnDavid DorseyHeather SaienniJennifer GainfortJoe FiorentinoKaren LauerKeith BauerLindsey GarberBenefit freeze ordinanceFiduciary Liability InsuranceInvestment Policy StatementSummary Plan DescriptionTrustmark custodial agreement - 6.e
Consideration of Amendment to the FY26 Adopted Budget
on consentApproval of a budget amendment to transfer $38,010 within the Sewer fund to cover repair and purchase of pumps that exceed the $5,000 capitalization threshold and must be recorded as capital expenditures.
$38,010
- 10Adjournment